Yea….this kind of makes my point. I am not an authority on all this (I’m sure you’ll get others who are), but these are my thoughts:
- End Immunity. Economically, this is a horrible precedent to set, and could ripple through the legal system to all sorts of other products. Count me out. And no, this would be apples and oranges when compared to tobacco settlements.
- Safe Storage, Bump Stocks, Ammunition Checks: These fall into the category of “nibbling around the edges”. And I would be in favor for better regulation on storage and the bump stock legislation, but not because I think they’re going to reduce mass killings.
- Straw purchases, Under-21’s, Protection Orders: Probably unconstitutional.
- Background checks: 22%? That’s a suspicious stat, in my view. But I have no problem with background checks; the issue is that very few of these mass killings, in my knowledge, used guns that were legally obtained (the recent Texas shooter shouldn’t have been able to get his, but the Air Force screwed up). Background checks only throttle firearms that were legally obtained.
- Smart Guns: Interesting idea, all for it. Don’t see how that would cut down on any shootings, though.